LOTERRE - Linked Open TERminology REsources - What can be done with the “Check” service?

Home / Loterre services / What can be done with the “Check” service?

The « Check » service permits an online chek of a SKOS terminology file validity.
It allows three types of checks to be performed: collections validity, concepts validity, concept scheme validity.

The color code of the detected anomalies indicates their degree of severity:

red background	critical anomaly
orange background	major anomaly
yellow background	minor anomaly

Check of the collections validity

The service Controlling a SKOS/RDF-XML file at the collections level processes files containing “skos:Collection” or “rdf:Description[rdf:type[@rdf:resource=’http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#Collection’]]” or “rdf:Description[rdf:type[@rdf:resource=’http://purl.org/iso25964/skos-thes#ConceptGroup’]]”.

It performs a preliminary analysis of the resource to determine:

the number of “Collection” blocks;
the nature and number of elements (properties) that compose them.

It then performs the checks and returns the results in the form of a table detailing the types of anomalies detected.

List of checks carried out:

Code	Anomaly description
Col-0	The resource contains neither skos:Collection, nor isothes:ConceptGroup, nor rdf:Description[rdf:type[@rdf:resource=’http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#Collection’]] or “rdf:Description[rdf:type[@rdf:resource=’http://purl.org/iso25964/skos-thes#ConceptGroup’]]” element.
Col-@0	Missing URI identifier. A collection has no identifier.
Col-@N	Unauthorized attribute. Only the “rdf:about” attribute is authorized for “skos:Collection” or rdf:Description[rdf:type[@rdf:resource=’http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#Collection’]] or “rdf:Description[rdf:type[@rdf:resource=’http://purl.org/iso25964/skos-thes#ConceptGroup’]]” element.
Col-2	Anomaly of structuration of collections. Despite the presence of an “isothes:superGroup” property in collections, no “isothes:subGroup” property was found in the corresponding super-collection. The menu “Insert narrower collections in a valid SKOS/RDF-XML file” can be used to fix the problem.
Col-3	Inconsistency at the resource identifier level. The value of “rdf:resource” attribute on “skos:inScheme” element of a collection is different from the resource identifier (ConceptScheme).
Col-4	Non-existent member. A member of a collection is not a concept of the resource. Create the corresponding concept or delete this member.
Col-5	Collection identifier contains an unauthorized character (white space, apostrophe, double quotation mark, left bracket, right bracket).

Check of the concepts validity

The service Controlling a SKOS/RDF-XML file at the concept level processes files containing “skos:Concept” or “rdf:Description[rdf:type[@rdf:resource=’http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#Concept’]]”.

It performs a preliminary analysis of the resource to determine:

the number of “skos:ConceptScheme”, “skos:Concept”, “skos:Collection” and “skosxl:Label” blocks;
the nature and number of elements (properties) that compose them;
the languages of the resource.

It then performs the checks and returns the results in the form of a table detailing the types of anomalies detected.

List of checks carried out:

Code	Anomaly description
D-Id	Uniqueness of the identifier (URI) of a given concept. Two different concepts can’t have the same identifier.
E-0	Presence of an empty field (property). May interfere with the continuation of the control program. Can also prevent import into some terminology editors.
@-0	Presence of an empty attribute.
R-A1	Clash between semantic relations: the same concept is a related concept and a broader concept (direct or indirect) of the current concept. Cf. SKOS Reference (S27 Integrity Condition).
R-FX1	Reflexive hierarchical relation: a concept is its own broader concept.
R-FX2	Reflexive associative relation: a concept is its own related concept.
R-31	Clash between associative and hierarchical relations: if concept A has concept B as a narrower concept and concept C as a related concept, then C can not be a narrower concept of B because concept C can not be linked simultaneously to concept A by two disjoint relationships “skos:narrowerTransitive” and “skos:related”. See details in SKOS-Primer and SKOS Reference.
R-32	Clash between associative and hierarchical relations: if concept A has concept B as a broader concept and concept C as a related concept, then C can not be a broader concept of B because concept C can not be linked simultaneously to concept A by two disjoint relationships “skos:broaderTransitive” and “skos:related”. See details in SKOS-Primer.
R-B3	Cycle between semantic relations: the same concept is a narrower concept and a broader concept of the current concept.
R-A2	Clash between semantic relations: the same concept is a related concept and a narrower concept of the current concept. See SKOS Reference (S27 Integrity Condition).
R-NS	Non-symmetric associative link (skos:related). See SKOS Reference (Axiom S23); see Symmetry correction
R-0	Relation (skos:related, skos:broader or skos:narrower) that targets a non-existent concept.
R-OR	Orphan concept: a concept that is not a top-concept, and which has neither broader nor narrower concepts.
CS-0	Concept not linked to the concept scheme through “skos:inScheme” element.
CS-3	Inconsistency at the level of the resource identifier (URI). The value of “rdf:resource” attribute in “skos:inScheme” element is different from the resource identifier.
LP-0	Missing preferred label for one of the resource languages.
LP-N1	More than one value preferred label per language tag. See SKOS Reference (S14 Integrity Condition)
LP-LA1	Preferred label / alternative label duplicate within the same concept. See SKOS Reference (S13 Integrity Condition)
LP-LC1	Preferred label / hidden label duplicate within the same concept. See SKOS Reference (S13 Integrity Condition)
LP-LP2	Same preferred label for two different concepts.
LP-LA2	Preferred label / alternative label duplicate between two different concepts.
LP-LC2	Preferred label / hidden label duplicate between two different concepts.
LA-LA1	Alternative label duplicate within the same concept.
LA-LA2	Same alternative label for two different concepts.
LA-LC1	Alternative label / hidden label duplicate within the same concept. See SKOS Reference (S13 Integrity Condition)
LA-LC2	Alternative label / hidden label duplicate between two different concepts.
LC-LC1	Hidden label duplicate within the same concept.
LC-LC2	Same hidden label for two different concepts.

Check of the concepts scheme validity

The service Controlling a SKOS/RDF-XML file at the concept scheme level processes files containing “skos:ConceptScheme” or “rdf:Description[rdf:type[@rdf:resource=’http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#ConceptScheme’]]”.

It performs a preliminary analysis of the resource is performed to determine:

the number of “ConceptScheme” blocks;
the nature and number of elements (properties) that compose them.

It then performs the checks and returns the results in the form of a table detailing the types of anomalies detected.

List of checks carried out:

Code	Anomaly description
CS-N	Missing ConceptScheme element. The file contains neither a skos:ConceptScheme element nor a rdf:Description[rdf:type[@rdf:resource=’http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#ConceptScheme’]] element. The menu Insert a skos:ConceptScheme can be used to fix the problem.
CS-0	Missing concept scheme identifier (URI).
CS-1	Unauthorized attribute in ConceptScheme element. Only rdf:about attribute is authorized.
CS-2	Missing skos:hasTopConcept properties. Despite a great structuration of the resource ConceptScheme element lacks skos:hasTopConcept properties to list top-concepts . The menu “Insert hasTopConcept properties” can be used to fix the problem.
CS-3	Inconsistency at the level of the resource identifier (URI). The value of rdf:resource attribute in skos:inScheme element of a given concept is different from the resource identifier.